I’m not complaining, I’m just communicating. The good news is that I can package an Windows exe from Linux (and all three Linux architectures). Easy peasy as I expected. I also discovered that OSX is quite happy unpacking .tgz downloads as well as the previous .tbz. So that’s what I’m going to produce. That’s important info for a reason.
No one likes BINJECT::dmg. It’s a cess pool. As i mentioned in the previous paragraph, tgz works just fine now days. The OSX handling could look a lot more like Linux (with plists and so on). The bad news is that packaging FOR linux uses the pure Ruby Minitar code inside Shoes and it is butt ugly slow when it’s 15MB to unpack. Probably because no one ever packed a Shoes script for linux with linux since It was well known not to work. That works now and it’s slow.
Why would I inflict that overhead on OSX packaging? Because packaging has little value other than the cool factor. Are you really going to pass around 20MB .exe/.app/,run when the user could download and install Shoes permanently and then download a small shy of your script? Another cool and impractible idea is to set the minimum wage to ‘livable/sustainable/fair’ and pay for it with magical green unicorn farts, Packaging is not sustainable. I may get it to work again because I’m pig headed. Butt ugly and slow is good enough for something you shouldn’t be using.
I might also discover that gem:: can read tar balls or maybe new zip specs are good enough. We’ll see.